Could govt be made partly responsible for gambling addict deaths

[steveh35]

The parents of a gambling addict from Sheffield who killed himself want the government to be partly responsible for his death under the same rules as a person dying in police custody.

A pre inquest review today said they would not be examining state regulation of gambling but would agree to look at the state's provision of medical services and whether gambling addicts have state support if they have a problem.

The parents of Jack Ritchie have asked for article 2 of the European Court of Human Rights, the right to life be engaged in the case.

This means that nobody, including the Government, can try to end your life. It also means the Government should take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect you and, in some circumstances, by taking steps to protect you if your life is at risk.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Bloatgoat]

The thing with gambling at home is,

The social isolement. This is what causes people to hit tilt. You know in a regular casino people are kind of looking out for you as well, apart from the bogus land bases ones, but i do remember i had staff often trying to have a talk with me in my 3 years of visit. Their intention was to determine if i was capable of playing (gambling) and sustain losses, in a nutshell.

Online? They really dont care.

 

[Mouche12]

It's true that staff and patrons can be quite chatty and engaging. That was also my experience at Holland Casino, especially when I won €9 000 back in 2007 in one night (starting off with €250) - people trying to convince me that it was time to head home... which I did.

But generally, RTP is around 5% lower compared to online slots so I've only visited the casino a few times since then.

 

[Bloatgoat]

It's true that staff and patrons can be quite chatty and engaging. That was also my experience at Holland Casino, especially when I won €9 000 back in 2007 in one night (starting off with €250) - people trying to convince me that it was time to head home... which I did.

But generally, RTP is around 5% lower compared to online slots so I've only visited the casino a few times since then.

I can recall that. When i won a staggering 17K in HC they offered me a dine of choice on the house. It's a very gentle way of saying, hey, you've done enough now, lets get you out of here.

 

[Jono777]

Sympathetic of course but my question is this...

Where does it all end and just how many other shortfalls, downfalls, bad luck, whether heartbreaking, sad times or otherwise will be linked no matter how directly or indirectly to gambling???

 

[ternur]

The parents of a gambling addict from Sheffield who killed himself want the government to be partly responsible for his death under the same rules as a person dying in police custody.

A pre inquest review today said they would not be examining state regulation of gambling but would agree to look at the state's provision of medical services and whether gambling addicts have state support if they have a problem.

The parents of Jack Ritchie have asked for article 2 of the European Court of Human Rights, the right to life be engaged in the case.

This means that nobody, including the Government, can try to end your life. It also means the Government should take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect you and, in some circumstances, by taking steps to protect you if your life is at risk.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

From a legal point of view, this case would probably not pass the so called Osman Test regarding the application of Article 2 of the ECHR. This test is used to measure the risk of real or immediate threat to life.

The ECtHR stated in the Osman v. the United Kingdom judgement, that "not every claimed risk to life can entail for the authorities a Convention requirement to take operational measures to prevent that risk from materialising". To substantiate a violation of Article 2, it must be shown that "the authorities did not do all that was expected of them to prevent a certain and immediate risk".

The right to life article (Art 2) of the convention does not impose on a state a general obligation to prevent all suicides in the society -- This would naturally be an impossible obligation. The only situations where this would apply to suicides would be when the person is under surveillance or care/custody of the public authorities (or doing military service).

The appropriate standard to safeguard life in cases where no real or immediate threat to life is present is not an easy one to set. The ECtHR has developed in its jurisprudence a doctrine of positive obligations. But it's impossible to define an exhaustive list of examples of situations in which positive obligations might arise. These cases have been exceptions rather than common.

 

[chuchu59]

Since I am a gambling addict I should keep out of this.

 

[toph11]

poor guy tried everything to kick his gambling addiction
he even moved to vietnam but he still found ways to gamble online

 

[nutnut]

I would argue the parents are more to blame than the government for the death. But hey it's cool to blame the system for everything.